[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 20]
[Senate]
[Pages 27371-27372]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          FISA REAUTHORIZATION

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, as the House prepares to take up the 
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, I wish to remind our colleagues 
what we decided about this program a little over 2 months ago.
  In August, a bipartisan Senate majority voted to embrace the two 
principles behind the original FISA law in 1978: that foreign 
terrorists overseas are a legitimate target--a legitimate target--for 
warrantless surveillance, and that Americans at home are not.
  We did this because we had been informed by the Director of National 
Intelligence that advances in technology and an outdated provision in 
law had made it impossible for the intelligence community to act on the 
first of these principles, causing us to miss significant actionable 
intelligence.
  The Senate responded to this information accordingly. We addressed 
the change in technology and updated the law, restoring to the 
intelligence community a tool it had effectively used even before the 
9/11 attacks to track terrorist activity abroad.
  Congress made sure in 1978 that the intelligence community was free 
to collect intelligence on foreign targets overseas and act on it 
quickly. In a post-9/11 world, we were insisting they continue to have 
this vital capability. Now we will have the chance to insist on it 
again, by voting against the bill

[[Page 27372]]

that is being considered in the House or by approving an alternative 
that corrects its flaws.
  The bill that is being taken up in the House has two major 
weaknesses. First, it requires intelligence officials to obtain a 
warrant before listening in on foreign terrorist suspects abroad. In 
other words, if we want to listen in on a terrorist in Tehran who may 
be talking about blowing up Los Angeles, we would have to stop and get 
a court approval first. I guarantee you, there is not a single person 
in this country outside this building who thinks that makes a bit of 
sense.
  It is common sense that our ability to act quickly on the 
intelligence we get is a crucial part of our ability to prevent terror 
attacks here at home. This dangerous provision would create a new 
hurdle for intelligence officials to jump before they can collect and 
act on a live potential threat. Allowing it to stand would have been 
foolish before 9/11. It would be inexcusable now, which is exactly why 
we acted to remove it in August and why the President has rightly said 
he will veto any law that retains it.
  Now, the second problem: This bill would expose U.S. phone companies 
to giant lawsuits for cooperating with the intelligence community in 
pursuit of terrorists, for doing their part--their part--to defend this 
country from terrorist groups such as al-Qaida. We need to be making it 
easier for our intelligence officials to detect terrorist plots against 
us, not harder, and we need to be rewarding people for helping us in 
this fight, not penalizing them or scaring them with the threat of a 
lawsuit if they do.
  So let's make something clear right now: Any bill that leaves this 
Chamber must restore to intelligence officials the same tools they have 
had in fighting terrorism for decades. And it should reassure U.S. 
businesses that they have no reason to regret cooperating with 
intelligence officials in the past and that they should not be the 
least bit afraid to do so in the future.
  The Bill of Rights does not extend to terrorists overseas who want to 
hurt us here at home. Our laws have always reflected that. In a post-9/
11 world we are being asked to affirm it. We did not hesitate in 
August. We should not hesitate now.
  The House bill that is being considered needs some major work. In 
addition to the 2 points I have raised, House Democrats have also 
struck a provision that allows the United States to conduct warrantless 
surveillance on foreign suspects who have information relating to the 
conduct of foreign affairs. In a time of heightened threats, we cannot 
throw away the tools we have always used to keep this country safe. I 
would urge my colleagues to give intelligence officials the tools they 
need to protect us, to give them a bill that the President will sign 
into law.
  We cannot let our enemies exploit a weakness that we--and now they--
can clearly see. We know the threat is real. The bill we pass should 
reflect that.

                          ____________________